DOCSLIB.ORG

GDI) and Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI): a Cross-Country Empirical Study (1998 – 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GDI) and Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI): a Cross-Country Empirical Study (1998 – 2017 Open Political Science, 2021; 4: 15–26 Research Article Debasish Roy* Formulation of Governance and Democracy Index (GDI) and Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI): A Cross-country Empirical Study (1998 – 2017) https://doi.org/10.1515/openps-2021-0002 received July 6, 2020; accepted August 10, 2020. Abstract: This research paper is aimed at formulation of a composite Governance and Democracy Index (GDI) based on the six indicators of good governance by Kaufmann et al. (2003, 2007) to assess and evaluate the relative performances of 10 major democracies of the world for the time period of 20 years (1998 – 2017) (Base Year = 1996). In order to do so, three distinct methodologies are adopted based on the absolute values and relative changes in the observations of independent variables. The extended part of this research involves formulation of Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI) which incorporates the Emancipative values. Keywords: Control of Corruption Relative (CCR); Government Effectiveness Relative (GER); Political Stability Relative (PSR); Governance and Democracy Index (GDI); Governance and Democracy Index Area (GDIA); Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI). JEL Classifications: C10; C43; C65; H11; P52. 1 Introduction The modern concept of governance originated from the Greek verb κυβερνάω (kubernáo) as coined by Plato which means “to steer” – and it should be the focal theme of a political leader (Republic 8.551c). According to Shin (2016), “Whereas government is a descriptive term that refers to the official institutions of a state, the term governance has had a normative cast since its inception, signifying forms of rule that produce desired ends”. In the neoliberal regime, the states diffuse power by devolution, allocating responsibilities to supranational, regional, and sub-national organizations by ‘contracting out’ responsibilities to private firms and corporations (e.g., World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), etc.), and by fostering the exercise of autonomy as a duty to manage itself according to the neoliberal principles, such as rational and responsible ‘choice’ (Novas and Rose, 2000; Rose, 2001). According to Rittel and Webber (1973), the major reason why the states have to depend on other agents and share their power is the growing complexity of our modern day societies and the emergence of ‘wicked problems’. Roberts (2000) has opined that these problems encompass a high level of conflict among the stakeholders where there is neither an agreement about the problem nor an amicable solution. Under these stalemate situations, the public sector organizations form an agreement with private sector organizations and citizens in order to reach decisions regarding implementation of policies. According to Mendoza and Vernis (2008), these wicked problems require the establishment of collaborative processes between public agencies and other public, civil, society and business organizations. Due to globalization and *Corresponding author: Debasish Roy, Research Scholar, Department of Management, Sikkim University, Gangtok - 737102, Sikkim, India, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Open Access. © 2021 Debasish Roy, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. 16 Debasish Roy internationalization of problems, the major idea of governance is related to shifting of powers in every direction. Apart from the shifting of powers, governance may show flexibility and adopt the following domains as: A structure referring to the formal and informal set of institutions involved; a process referring to the dynamics and leading functions that take place in the process of policy making; a mechanism referring to the institutional procedures of decision-making, as well as compliance and control; and a strategy referring to the manipulation of the institutional and mechanical design with the aim of influencing choices and preferences (Levi-Faur, 2012). On the other hand, liberal democracy acts as the proper foundation of good governance and economic development. Researchers like Olson (1993) and Rodrik (1999) have showed that the countries which had achieved the highest form of economic performance were all stable democracies. Dahl (1971) emphasized that a truly representative democratic government must be based on the principles of popular sovereignty; competitive political participation and representation; free, fair, and regular elections; universal suffrage; freedom of expression and conscience; the universal right to form political associations and participate in the political process; inclusive citizenship; and adherence to the constitution and rule of law. According to Sen (2001), democracies help to enrich and improve individual lives through granting of political and civil rights, and help to improve the level of welfare for the poor as compared to other political systems. Thus by taking a cue from the prior scholarly works, this research work is aimed at formulating a composite Governance and Democracy Index (GDI) based on the six indicators of good governance by Kaufmann et al. (2003, 2007) which would be able to successfully project the standings of the sample countries in terms of governance and democratic yardsticks for the given time period of 20 years. Out of those six indicators; five indicators, viz., Control of Corruption (CC), Government Effectiveness (GE), Political Stability (PS), Regulatory Quality (RQ), and Rule of Law (RL) are grouped together to represent the concept of governance whereas the sole remaining indicator, i.e., Voice and Accountability (VA) is singled out to represent the concept of democracy. Three distinct methodologies were followed to formulate the GDI: first, the technique of estimating the Geometric Mean (GM) of the six indicators using the Quantity Relative Index method with Base Year = 1996; second, a Geometric Mean (GM) of all the six indicators was taken into account; followed by estimation of Governance and Democracy Index Areas (GDIA) of 7 sample countries with lower and upper bounds of integrals as -2.5 and 2.5 respectively where larger GDIA translates to better ranking of the country in terms of governance and democratic practices; and third, the GDI is derived by summation of Government and Democracy Index Relative Change (GDIRC) of each indicator comprised of equal weights of 10 percent each for the first five indicators (variables) which collectively represent Governance and 50 percent weight for the remaining indicator (variable) representing Democracy (Base Year = 1996)(no change) since according to one of the fundamentals of statistical theory, the GDI for the base year should be 100. For the first two methods, 7 out of 10 sample countries were considered for estimation since all the values of 6 variables were positive for those seven countries. 2 Data Descriptions The Metadata for (the) six chosen variables from (the) World Bank1 database are quoted as given below: – Control of Corruption: “Control of Corruption captures perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as “capture” of the state by elites and private interests. Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5” (World Bank); – Government Effectiveness: “Government Effectiveness captures perceptions of the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of the government’s commitment to such policies. Estimate gives the country’s score on the 1 Data available at: https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/worldwide-governance-indicators Formulation of Governance and Democracy Index (GDI) and Governance, Democracy, and Emancipation Index (GDEI) 17 aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5” (World Bank); – Political Stability: “Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism measures perceptions of the likelihood of political instability and/or politically-motivated violence, including terrorism. Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5” (World Bank); – Regulatory Quality: “Regulatory Quality captures perceptions of the ability of the government to formulate and implement sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private sector development. Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5” (World Bank); – Rule of Law: “Rule of Law captures perceptions of the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, property rights, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5” (World Bank; and – Voice and Accountability: “Voice and Accountability captures perceptions of the extent to which a country’s citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Global Peace Index 2018: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2018
    Quantifying Peace and its Benefits The Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. IEP achieves its goals by developing new conceptual frameworks to define peacefulness; providing metrics for measuring peace; and uncovering the relationships between business, peace and prosperity as well as promoting a better understanding of the cultural, economic and political factors that create peace. IEP is headquartered in Sydney, with offices in New York, The Hague, Mexico City and Brussels. It works with a wide range of partners internationally and collaborates with intergovernmental organisations on measuring and communicating the economic value of peace. For more information visit www.economicsandpeace.org Please cite this report as: Institute for Economics & Peace. Global Peace Index 2018: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2018. Available from: http://visionofhumanity.org/reports (accessed Date Month Year). Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Key Findings 4 RESULTS 5 Highlights 6 2018 Global Peace Index rankings 8 Regional overview 12 Improvements & deteriorations 19 TRENDS 23 Ten year trends in the Global Peace Index 26 100 year trends in peace 32 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VIOLENCE 45 Results 46 The macroeconomic impact of peace 52 POSITIVE PEACE 59 What is Positive Peace? 60 Trends in Positive Peace 65 What precedes a change in peacefulness? 69 Positive Peace and the economy 73 APPENDICES 77 Appendix A: GPI Methodology 78 Appendix B: GPI indicator sources, definitions & scoring criteria 82 Appendix C: GPI Domain scores 90 Appendix D: Economic cost of violence 93 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX 2018 | 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the twelfth edition of the Global Peace Index Afghanistan, South Sudan, Iraq, and Somalia comprise (GPI), which ranks 163 independent states and the remaining least peaceful countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy Index 2010 Democracy in Retreat a Report from the Economist Intelligence Unit
    Democracy index 2010 Democracy in retreat A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit www.eiu.com Democracy index 2010 Democracy in retreat The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Index of Democracy 2010 Democracy in retreat This is the third edition of the Economist Intelligence Unit’s democracy index. It reflects the situation as of November 2010. The first edition, published in The Economist’sThe World in 2007, measured the state of democracy in September 2006 and the second edition covered the situation towards the end of 2008. The index provides a snapshot of the state of democracy worldwide for 165 independent states and two territories—this covers almost the entire population of the world and the vast majority of the world’s independent states (micro states are excluded). The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Index of Democracy is based on five categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. Countries are placed within one of four types of regimes: full democracies; flawed democracies; hybrid regimes; and authoritarian regimes. Free and fair elections and civil liberties are necessary conditions for democracy, but they are unlikely to be sufficient for a full and consolidated democracy if unaccompanied by transparent and at least minimally efficient government, sufficient political participation and a supportive democratic political culture. It is not easy to build a sturdy democracy. Even in long-established ones, if not nurtured and protected, democracy can corrode. Democracy in decline The global record in democratisation since the start of its so-called third wave in 1974, and acceleration after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, has been impressive.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy Index 2020 in Sickness and in Health?
    Democracy Index 2020 In sickness and in health? A report by The Economist Intelligence Unit www.eiu.com The world leader in global business intelligence The Economist Intelligence Unit (The EIU) is the research and analysis division of The Economist Group, the sister company to The Economist newspaper. Created in 1946, we have over 70 years’ experience in helping businesses, financial firms and governments to understand how the world is changing and how that creates opportunities to be seized and risks to be managed. Given that many of the issues facing the world have an international (if not global) dimension, The EIU is ideally positioned to be commentator, interpreter and forecaster on the phenomenon of globalisation as it gathers pace and impact. EIU subscription services The world’s leading organisations rely on our subscription services for data, analysis and forecasts to keep them informed about what is happening around the world. We specialise in: • Country Analysis: Access to regular, detailed country-specific economic and political forecasts, as well as assessments of the business and regulatory environments in different markets. • Risk Analysis: Our risk services identify actual and potential threats around the world and help our clients understand the implications for their organisations. • Industry Analysis: Five year forecasts, analysis of key themes and news analysis for six key industries in 60 major economies. These forecasts are based on the latest data and in-depth analysis of industry trends. EIU Consulting EIU Consulting is a bespoke service designed to provide solutions specific to our customers’ needs. We specialise in these key sectors: • Healthcare: Together with our two specialised consultancies, Bazian and Clearstate, The EIU helps healthcare organisations build and maintain successful and sustainable businesses across the healthcare ecosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012-Global-Peace-Index-Report.Pdf
    INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE GLOBAL PEACE INDEX 2012 1 THE INStitUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE GLOBAL QUANTIFYING PEACE AND ITS BENEFITS PEACE INDEX The Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) is an 2012 independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. IEP achieves its goals by developing new This is the sixth edition of the Global Peace Index peaceful environments. conceptual frameworks to define peacefulness; (GPI), which ranks nations according to their level In the spirit of deepening knowledge and providing metrics for measurement; uncovering the of peacefulness. It is composed of 23 qualitative and understanding of the relative peacefulness of nations, relationship between peace, business and prosperity; quantitative indicators from highly respected sources, IEP has developed the first known attempt to quantify and by promoting a better understanding of the which gauge three broad themes: the level of safety measures of positive peace through the Positive Peace cultural, economic and political factors that drive and security in society; the extent of domestic or Index (PPI). This study measures the strength of the peacefulness. international conflict; and the degree of militarisation. attitudes, institutions, and structures within nations IEP has offices in Sydney, New York, and The 2012 GPI has been expanded to rank 158 which sustain peace. This provides a framework Washington, D.C. It works with a wide range of independent states and updated with the latest to determine a nation’s institutional capacity and partners internationally and collaborates with available figures and information.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy for All? V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2018
    INSTITUTE VARIETIES OF DEMOCRACY Democracy for All? V-DEM ANNUAL DEMOCRACY REPORT 2018 Table of Contents V-DEM ANNUAL REPOrt 2018 INTRODUCTION EXECUTivE SUMMARY V-DEM IN A NUTSHELL A WORD FROM THE V-DEM IN NUMBERS, TEAM COLLABORATIONS, METHODOLOGY, AND HisTORICAL V-DEM 05 06 08 SECTION 1 STATE OF THE WORLD 2017 – LiBERAL AND ELECTORAL DEMOCRACY 16 SECTION 2 INCLUsiON is AN ILLUsiON 34 SECTION 2.1 SECTION 2.2 SECTION 2.3 WOMEN’S INCLUsiON INCLUsiON OF SOCiaL POLITICAL EXCLUsiON AND ACCEss TO POWER GROUPS BasED ON SOCIO- ECONOMIC INEQUALITY 38 44 52 V-DEM UsERS V-DEM PUBLICATIONS REFERENCES PRACTITIONERS, ACadEMIC JOURNAL ACadEMICS, STUDENTS, ARTICLES FROM THE AND MUSEUMS V-DEM TEAM 58 60 69 APPENdiX COUNTRY SCORES FOR 2017 71 V-Dem is a unique approach to measuring democracy – historical, multidimensional, nuanced, and disaggregated – employing state- of-the-art methodology. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) produces the largest V-Dem measures hundreds of different attributes global dataset on democracy with some 19 million of democracy. V-Dem enables new ways to study data for 201 countries from 1789 to 2017. Involving the nature, causes, and consequences of democracy over 3,000 scholars and other country experts, embracing its multiple meanings. V-Dem is or has been funded by (not in order of magnitude): Development Agency, NORAD/the Norwegian Research Coun- Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation, cil, International IDEA, Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos, Marianne & Marcus Wallenberg Foundation, the Swedish Research Aarhus University, the Quality of Government Institute and the Council, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, the European Research University of Notre Dame, with co-funding from the Vice Chancel- Council, the Danish Research Council, the European Union/the lor, the Dean of the Social Sciences, and the Department of Politi- European Commission, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs-Sweden, the cal Science at University of Gothenburg.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy Index 2018: Me Too? Political Participation, Protest and Democracy a Report by the Economist Intelligence Unit
    Democracy Index 2018: Me too? Political participation, protest and democracy A report by The Economist Intelligence Unit www.eiu.com The world leader in global business intelligence The Economist Intelligence Unit (The EIU) is the research and analysis division of The Economist Group, the sister company to The Economist newspaper. Created in 1946, we have over 70 years’ experience in helping businesses, financial firms and governments to understand how the world is changing and how that creates opportunities to be seized and risks to be managed. Given that many of the issues facing the world have an international (if not global) dimension, The EIU is ideally positioned to be commentator, interpreter and forecaster on the phenomenon of globalisation as it gathers pace and impact. EIU subscription services The world’s leading organisations rely on our subscription services for data, analysis and forecasts to keep them informed about what is happening around the world. We specialise in: • Country Analysis: Access to regular, detailed country-specific economic and political forecasts, as well as assessments of the business and regulatory environments in different markets. • Risk Analysis: Our risk services identify actual and potential threats around the world and help our clients understand the implications for their organisations. • Industry Analysis: Five year forecasts, analysis of key themes and news analysis for six key industries in 60 major economies. These forecasts are based on the latest data and in-depth analysis of industry trends. EIU Consulting EIU Consulting is a bespoke service designed to provide solutions specific to our customers’ needs. We specialise in these key sectors: • EIU Consumer: We help consumer-facing companies to enter new markets as well as deliver greater success in current markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy Facing Global Challenges
    INSTITUTE VARIETIES OF DEMOCRACY Democracy Facing Global Challenges V-DEM ANNUAL DEMOCRACY REPORT 2019 V-Dem is a unique approach to measuring democracy – historical, multidimensional, nuanced, and disaggregated – employing state- of-the-art methodology. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) produces V-Dem measures hundreds of different the largest global dataset on democracy attributes of democracy. V-Dem enables with some 27 million data points for 202 new ways to study the nature, causes, and countries from 1789 to 2018. Involving over consequences of democracy embracing its 3,000 scholars and other country experts, multiple meanings. We are very grateful for our funders’ support over the years, which has made this venture possible. To learn more about our funders, please visit: https://www.v-dem.net/en/v-dem-institute/funders The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect an official position of the V-Dem Project or the V-Dem Steering Committee. Produced by the V-Dem Institute Editing/Proof-Reading: John Jennings V-Dem Institute: at the University of Gothenburg Design: Anders Wennerström, Spiro Kommunikation AB Department of Political Science Printing: Response Tryck, Borås University of Gothenburg V-Dem Annual Report Team: Anna Lührmann (Lead Author Picture credits go to: Evan Wise (cover image: Parthenon Sprängkullsgatan 19, PO 711 and Coordination), Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Staffan I. on Acropolis, Greece), Karin Andersson (team picture), Mika SE 405 30 Gothenburg Sweden Lindberg, Laura Maxwell, Valeriya Mechkova, Richard Morgan, Baumeister, Danielle Muscato, Lana H. Haroun, Kieran Lettrich, [email protected] Natalia Stepanova, Shreeya Pillai.
    [Show full text]
  • Corruption Perceptions Index
    CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2018 Transparency International is a global movement with one vision: a world in which government, business, civil society and the daily lives of people are free of corruption. Through more than 100 chapters worldwide and an international secretariat in Berlin, we are leading the fight against corruption to turn this vision into reality. #cpi2018 www.transparency.org/cpi This work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0 Transparency International 2019. ISBN: 978-3-96076-084-9 Printed on 100% recycled paper. Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information was believed to be correct as of January 2019. Nevertheless, Transparency International cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts. Generous support for the Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 is provided by EY. CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2018 The 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index, published by Transparency International, measures the perceived levels of public sector corruption in 180 countries and territories. Drawing on 13 surveys of businesspeople and expert assessments, the index scores on a scale of zero (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). The results paint a sadly familiar picture: more than two-thirds of countries score below 50, while the average score is just 43. Perhaps most disturbing is that the vast majority of countries assessed have made little to no progress. Only 20 have made significant progress in recent years. As long as corruption continues to go largely unchecked, democracy is under threat around the world. “Corruption chips away at democracy to produce a vicious cycle, where corruption undermines democratic institutions and, in turn, weak institutions are less able to control corruption,” said Patricia Moreira, managing director of Transparency International.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparisons and Contrasts
    INSTITUTE Comparisons and Contrasts Version 5 - Dec 2015 Copyright © University of Gothenburg, V-Dem Institute, University of Notre Dame, Kellogg Institute. All rights reserved. Principal Investigators: • Michael Coppedge – University of Notre Dame • John Gerring – Boston University • Staffan I. Lindberg – University of Gothenburg • Svend-Erik Skaaning – Aarhus University • Jan Teorell – Lund University Suggested citation: Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Staffan I. Lindberg, Svend-Erik Skaaning, and Jan Teorell. 2015. “V-Dem Comparisons and Contrasts with Other Measurement Projects.” Varieties of Democracy (V- Dem) Project. 1 Table of Contents EXTANT INDICES 4 Table 1: Democracy Indices Compared 8 DEFINITION 9 SOURCES 10 DISAGGREGATION 14 COVERAGE 15 DISCRIMINATION 16 AGGREGATION 17 ASSESSING VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY 18 Figure 1: Intercorrelations between Polity and Freedom House 20 VARIETIES OF DEMOCRACY 21 PRINCIPLES 22 DISAGGREGATION 28 ADDITIONAL PAYOFFS 29 A PLURALITY OF APPROACHES 32 REFERENCES 34 APPENDIX A: IMPACT EVALUATION 43 APPENDIX B: KEY TERMS 46 APPENDIX C: SEARCH TERMS 49 2 In the wake of the Cold War democracy has gained the status of a mantra.1 However, no consensus has emerged about how to conceptualize and measure this key concept. Skeptics may wonder whether such comparisons are even possible. Distinguishing the most democratic countries from the least democratic ones is fairly easy: Almost everyone agrees that Switzerland is democratic and North Korea is not. It has proven to be much harder to make finer distinctions: Is Switzerland more democratic than the United States? Is Russia less democratic today than it was last year? Has Venezuela become more democratic in some respects and at the same time less democratic in others? Yet, if we cannot measure democracy in some fashion we cannot mark its progress and setbacks, explain processes of transition, reveal the consequences of those transitions, and affect their future course.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Peace Index 2020: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2020
    GLOBAL PEACE INDEX PEACE GLOBAL GLOBAL PEACE 2020 INDEX 2020 MEASURING PEACE IN A COMPLEX WORLD Institute for Economics & Peace Quantifying Peace and its Benefits The Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. IEP achieves its goals by developing new conceptual frameworks to define peacefulness; providing metrics for measuring peace; and uncovering the relationships between business, peace and prosperity as well as promoting a better understanding of the cultural, economic and political factors that create peace. IEP is headquartered in Sydney, with offices in New York, The Hague, Mexico City, Brussels and Harare. It works with a wide range of partners internationally and collaborates with intergovernmental organisations on measuring and communicating the economic value of peace. For more information visit www.economicsandpeace.org Please cite this report as: Institute for Economics & Peace. Global Peace Index 2020: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2020. Available from: http://visionofhumanity.org/reports (accessed Date Month Year). Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Key Findings 4 RESULTS 5 Highlights 6 2020 Global Peace Index Rankings 8 Regional Overview 13 Improvements & Deteriorations 20 TRENDS IN PEACEFULNESS 25 GPI Trends 26 GPI Domain Trends 28 Civil Unrest 32 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VIOLENCE 41 The Economic Value of Peace 2019 42 Methodology at a Glance 50 POSITIVE PEACE 53 What is Positive Peace? 54 Positive Peace and the COVID-19 Pandemic 57 Trends in Positive Peace 67 ECOLOGICAL THREAT REGISTER 71 Introduction 72 The Types of Ecological Threat 74 APPENDICES 83 Appendix A: GPI Methodology 84 Appendix B: GPI indicator sources, definitions & scoring criteria 88 Appendix C: GPI Domain Scores 96 Appendix D: Economic Cost of Violence 99 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX 2020 | 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the 14th edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI), North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Peace Index 2020: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2020
    GLOBAL PEACE INDEX PEACE GLOBAL GLOBAL PEACE 2020 INDEX 2020 MEASURING PEACE IN A COMPLEX WORLD Institute for Economics & Peace Quantifying Peace and its Benefits The Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP) is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank dedicated to shifting the world’s focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. IEP achieves its goals by developing new conceptual frameworks to define peacefulness; providing metrics for measuring peace; and uncovering the relationships between business, peace and prosperity as well as promoting a better understanding of the cultural, economic and political factors that create peace. IEP is headquartered in Sydney, with offices in New York, The Hague, Mexico City, Brussels and Harare. It works with a wide range of partners internationally and collaborates with intergovernmental organisations on measuring and communicating the economic value of peace. For more information visit www.economicsandpeace.org Please cite this report as: Institute for Economics & Peace. Global Peace Index 2020: Measuring Peace in a Complex World, Sydney, June 2020. Available from: http://visionofhumanity.org/reports (accessed Date Month Year). Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Key Findings 4 RESULTS 5 Highlights 6 2020 Global Peace Index Rankings 8 Regional Overview 13 Improvements & Deteriorations 20 TRENDS IN PEACEFULNESS 25 GPI Trends 26 GPI Domain Trends 28 Civil Unrest 32 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VIOLENCE 41 The Economic Value of Peace 2019 42 Methodology at a Glance 50 POSITIVE PEACE 53 What is Positive Peace? 54 Positive Peace and the COVID-19 Pandemic 57 Trends in Positive Peace 67 ECOLOGICAL THREAT REGISTER 71 Introduction 72 The Types of Ecological Threat 74 APPENDICES 83 Appendix A: GPI Methodology 84 Appendix B: GPI indicator sources, definitions & scoring criteria 88 Appendix C: GPI Domain Scores 96 Appendix D: Economic Cost of Violence 99 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX 2020 | 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the 14th edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI), North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy and Corruption: an Empirical Analysis in a Cross-Country Framework* Shrabani Saha Ph.D. Candidate in Economics Depart
    Democracy and Corruption: An Empirical Analysis in a Cross-Country Framework* Shrabani Saha Ph.D. candidate in Economics Department of Economics and Finance Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand [email protected] Abstract This study tests the impact of democratisation on corruption. In particular, does democracy necessarily reduce a country’s level of corruption? Using panel data estimations several indicators of democracy have been utilised to examine the impact on corruption. The results suggest that an ‘electoral democracy’, represented by ‘political rights’ is not sufficient to reduce corruption. An advanced fully-formed mature democracy, where the probability of being caught if acting corruptly is high, is crucial to combat corruption. The coefficients of the non-linear regressions suggest that democracy increases corruption in the early stage of democratic reforms; once past the threshold point however, corruption level decreases substantially in a well-functioning matured democracy. The results remain robust under the alternative panel estimations and with alternative corruption indices. Keywords: Democracy, Corruption, Panel data JEL classification: C23; K42; O50 ___________________________________________________________________________ *Paper prepared for presentation at the New Zealand Association of Economists Annual Conference, Wellington, 9-11 July 2008. Like to be considered for Jan Whitwell Prize. 1. Introduction Greater democracy, i.e. an expansion of political freedom, has dampening effects on the level of corruption. Barro (1999) argues that democratic institutions provide checks on governmental power which, in turn, limits the potential of public officials to accumulate personal wealth and to carry out unpopular policies. In contrast, Doig (2000) points out that in many electoral democracies, under the mask of political participation, political elites continue to manipulate the electoral process to legitimize retention of power and use the state machinery in pursuit of their own interests.
    [Show full text]